52 A Transactions. 
5. Itis to be regretted that Herr Finsch does not cite some examples of 
the “many birds from the highest latitudes of the eastern hemisphere,” 
which, as he states, “touch on New Zealand as their southern resting-place 
in their winter migrations,’ especially as the reviewer adds that “the 
known number of these is continually augmenting under recent investiga- 
tions.” I am ata loss to know to what species these remarks are intended 
to refer. 
6. Whether Circus gouldi and Circus assimilis are identical is still, I 
believe, a disputed point with ornithologists; and as I have not been able to 
compare specimens, I cannot offer an opinion upon it. Mr. Gould (* Hand- 
book,” I., p. 58) does not attempt to settle the question, although he expresses 
an iie in favour of their identity. 
. The two owls introduced by Herr Finsch into the New Zealand list, 
iiad, Strix delicatula and Scops nove-zealandie, must be held in vox 
till we have more precise data. 
My Strix haasti was only entered provisionally on the authority of Dr. 
Haast’s communication, as quoted in the “ Essay.” 
8. Herr Finsch, while admitting that the real native country of Halcyon | 
cinnamominus, Swainson, does not appear to be fully determined, asserts very 
positively that it does not occur in New Zealand. Local ornithologists are 
surely better authorities on such points. I have never met with the species, 
and have always considered it of doubtful authenticity as a New Zealand 
bird; but it must be borne in mind that many parts of the country are as yet 
unexplored, and that consequently one is scarcely justified in expunging, on 
merely negative evidence, a species introduced on apparently good authority. 
Dr. Hector is strongly of opinion that he shot a specimen of H. cinnamominus 
in the wild west coast region of the South Island. I submit, therefore, that 
the question of its existence in New Zealand is simply undetermined. 
9. Herr Finsch admits to the rank of a distinct species Anthornis ruficeps, 
Pelzeln, while he seems inclined to doubt the specific value of Anthornis 
auriocula, which he has never seen. 
Specimens of the former were sent to me by Dr. Haast, before being for- 
warded by him to Vienna, for examination. I hesitated to pronounce it a 
new bird, as the rufous colouring on the head appeared to be the result of 
flower stains. On communicating my doubts to Dr. Haast, he admitted that 
(when freshly killed) the feathers of the head were more or less stained with 
the yellow blossoms of Senecio cassinioides, on the nectar of which the birds 
had been feeding. 
Of the specific distinctness of Anthornis auriocula I never dictado 
any doubt. independently of the golden irides, which at once distinguish it 
from A. aelanura,it is much larger than the last-named species, and the tints 
